Compass Points - Course Correction
Steer a better course.
Compass Points - Course Correction
Steer a better course.
May 2, 2024
.
Everyone who cares about the Marine Corps wants the Marine Corps to be stronger.
.
In Washington today there are two events -- both very different from each other -- but both trying to move the Marine Corps in a better direction.
.
The first event is the whole series of budget hearings ongoing by the House Armed Services Committee (HASC) and other related hearings. Congress is asking tough questions about what needs to be funded and particularly what needs to be funded more.
.
At the same time nearby in Washington DC the Modern Day Marine Expo is being held. The Modern Day Marine Expo describes itself as: "Modern Day Marine is the largest military equipment, systems, services and technology exposition exclusively targeted to Marines and the Corps. The show floor hosts more than 300 exhibitors displaying the latest warfighting innovations and technology, briefings from influential Marines and DoD personnel."
.
Whenever changes are being made, new programs and systems being adopted, new initiatives begun, course corrections will be necessary always. At a panel discussion at the Modern Day Marine Expo, Marine Corps senior leaders discussed the problem of unsat barracks in the Marine Corps and described the course correction the Marine Corps is making:
.
============
.
“For too long, because we were taking risk in those types of initiatives in order to buy the weapons systems, they became more and more in disrepair,” Lt. Gen. James Adams, the deputy Marine commandant for programs and resources, said about the barracks at a panel discussion Wednesday at the Modern Day Marine conference in Washington.
. . . As part of the Barracks 2030 initiative, the Marine Corps plans to consolidate Marines in the better buildings and demolish the worse ones, install professional barracks managers and spend more money on restoring barracks. In February, the Corps ordered each barracks room to be inspected “wall to wall” so it could gather data about the problems and fix some of them immediately.
-- Marine Times
.
============
.
The Marine Corps is making a course correction about barracks. Is it the perfect course correction? Are civilian barracks managers really a good answer? Only time will tell. But the point is the Marine Corps found itself going in a wrong direction, admitted the error, and is now trying to move in a better direction.
.
In the same way, over in the HASC hearings, the Secretary of the Navy admitted a course correction is needed.
.
============
.
Following a year of tumult between the Navy, Marine Corps, broader Pentagon and numerous lawmakers over a proposed pause in amphibious shipbuilding, the service secretary today told a congressional committee the Pentagon should have been replacing its amphibious fleet sooner.
“There’s no question in my mind that we should have been buying more amphibious ships earlier,” Navy Secretary Carlos Del Toro told the House Armed Services Committee this morning during a hearing to review the service’s fiscal year 2025 budget request.
-- Breaking Defense
.
============
.
SecNav is publicly admitting a course correction is necessary. Last year SecNav ordered a "strategic pause" in building amphibious ships. Looking back now, SecNav admits that was not the best idea. The Navy should have been "buying more amphibious ships earlier."
.
Course correction. It happens all the time. It shows good leadership to be able to make a course correction.
.
Back in 2019 the Marine Corps attempted to get ahead of the future by focusing on small missile units of Marines. It has been years now since those decisions were made. With the worldwide conflicts, threats, and challenges facing the US, the Marine Corps must focus much less on being a narrow, regional, defensive missile force and instead focus much more on being the world's premier, upgraded and enhanced, global, crisis response force.
.
Marine Corps leaders testifying in current Congressional hearings must stop telling Congress that the Marine Corps is as ready as it has always been. It is true that squads of Marines are always ready to go and fight, but the Marine Corps, as an entire organization, needs more resources to get more ready. Marine Corps leaders must make an open and plain course correction. It is time for Marine Corps leaders to forthrightly tell Congress that the events in Ukraine and Gaza have made it clear the Marine Corps divested itself of units, weapons, equipment, and capabilities that are very much still needed. Congress must be told that the Marine Corps needs more funds to upgrade and enhance the global Marine MAGTF.
,
Course correction. It is not so hard. Course corrections happen every day. Course corrections are a sign of strong leadership. If the Secretary of the Navy can admit his own amphibious ship course correction, Marine Corps leaders should be able to forthrightly tell Congress that the Marine Corps needs immediate help to upgrade and enhance the Marine MAGTF.
.
Everyone who cares about the Marine Corps wants the Marine Corps to be stronger. When Marine barracks were found to be in bad shape, course correction. When amphibious shipping was found to be deficient, course correction. Now that Marine units, weapons, equipment, and capabilities need significant upgrade and enhancement, what should be done? Course correction.
.
- - - - -
.
Marine Times - 05/01/2024
How the Marine Corps’ barracks got to be so bad, according to 2 generals
By Irene Loewenson
.
- - - - -
.
Breaking Defense - 05/01/2024
Following last year’s turmoil, SECNAV says Navy should have been buying amphibs sooner
By Justin Katz
In his written statement before the HASC’s Readiness Subcommittee on 30 April, the ACMC stated: “We possess the fully trained and ready forces necessary for any crisis or contingency… we are ready for the unknown and the uncertain future ahead… we are ready to fulfill our title 10 requirements; ready to support our Allies and partners globally; ready to support sea denial efforts; ready to seize and defends key maritime terrain; and ready to respond to crises in every theater… our combat arms units are equipped with modern capabilities - - both for sensing and lethality - - far superior to past formations.”
I strongly disagree with this rosy assessment. Left unaddressed is how the Marine Corps can respond to global crises and contingencies across the spectrum of conflict with only 12 amphibious ships notionally ready for operations, only 7 MPS ships anchored in the Indian Ocean and Western Pacific, and an emasculated combined arms capability that is unable to adequately support Marine infantry in the close and rear battles. Statements not backed by facts are dangerous. To paraphrase former Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld: “When the nation calls, the Marines will go to war with the forces and equipment they have, not the imaginary forces and equipment briefed to Congress.”
But let’s just focus on one aspect of the written statement; specifically, “[we are] ready to support sea denial efforts.” Is the Marine Corps truly ready for this mission? We would know for sure if someone at Headquarters Marine Corps answered the following three questions:
1. How many of the 14 short-range, subsonic Naval Strike Missile batteries are manned, trained, and equipped today for employment in contested areas? How many of these batteries (if any) have their full combat load of missiles?
2. How many of the 3 mid-range, subsonic Tomahawk Land Attack Missile batteries are manned, trained, and equipped today for employment in contested areas? How many of these batteries (if any) have their full combat load of Maritime Strike Tomahawk missiles, which are needed to strike a moving ship?
3. How many of the 35 Landing Ship Medium (formerly Light Amphibious Warship) that the Marines say are needed to deploy Stand-in Forces into the contested areas, reposition them, and logistically support them are crewed and in theater today?
Answers to the above questions would tell us if Marines are truly “ready to support sea denial efforts,” unless of course one is talking about Marine air, which is always ready for any mission.
Yep, I was not impressed by the answers by either the SECNAV or the Commandant. To generalize the SECNAV answers to the individual committee questions on ship building, ship maintenance, lack of amphibious, small amphibious, F-35, FD 2030, the USS boxer, recruiting, bad barracks, etc., etc., etc. SECNAV answer was: Yes, that is a problem but it is now a priority (the "to fix" was implied). When one Congressman ask something like: SECNAV you seem to have a lot of priorities, which one is the highest priority? SECNAV’s none answer: Yes. I have many priorities.
I have also said this before: The Commandant showed no indication he was backing off the MLR and anti-ship HIMARS. In fact, he stated that the small amphib ship’s are a gotta have to move the HIMARS. When the SECNAV was asked why the current plan calls for only six amphibs, his answer; Yes, that is a problem and the small amphib are a priority. At least that is my perception.